A judge dismissed the federal criminal case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, ruling “with prejudice,” which prevents the Department of Justice (DOJ) from reviving the indictment. Judge Dale Ho criticized the DOJ’s assertion that prosecuting Adams would interfere with his governance, calling it an unprecedented move that might imply preferential treatment for compliant officials. The case stems from allegations of a decade-long campaign finance scheme involving illegal donations and bribery. Adams, who denied wrongdoing and claimed he had been wrongly targeted, expressed relief that the case was closed and thanked his supporters. The DOJ described the prosecution as politically motivated and a misuse of resources.
A federal judge ruled on Wednesday to dismiss the criminal case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, nearly two months after the Trump administration controversially aimed to have corruption charges against the Democrat dropped.
District Court Judge Dale Ho dismissed the case “with prejudice,” which prevents the Department of Justice from reviving the five-count indictment against Adams in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.
In his ruling, Ho declined the DOJ’s request to dismiss the case “without prejudice,” which would have permitted future refiling of charges against the mayor.
“It is essential to clarify that the Court’s ruling today does not pertain to Mayor Adams’ innocence or guilt,” Ho remarked.
The DOJ contended that the case should be dismissed without prejudice because prosecuting Adams would hinder his ability to lead the city and collaborate with President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.
Seven federal prosecutors, including the acting U.S. Attorney for Manhattan, resigned in protest of the DOJ’s directive to file the dismissal request.
In a striking critique of the DOJ’s rationale, Ho stated in his order, “Everything here smacks of a bargain: the dismissal of the Indictment in exchange for immigration policy concessions” by Adams.
“Stepping back from the specifics of this case, the DOJ’s immigration enforcement justification is both unprecedented and expansive,” the judge noted.
“The DOJ provides no examples, and the Court cannot identify any, of the government dropping charges against an elected official to enable that official to advance federal policy goals.”
Ho further asserted that the “DOJ’s claim that it has ‘virtually unreviewable’ authority to dismiss charges on this basis is alarming in its scope, suggesting that public officials may receive preferential treatment if they align with the incumbent administration’s policy priorities.”
“This implication fundamentally contradicts the essential promise of equal justice under the law,” the judge commented.
Ho stated that dismissing the case without prejudice “would inevitably create the impression that the Mayor’s freedom is tied to his ability to adhere to the immigration enforcement priorities of the administration.”
He also indicated that it could imply that Adams, who is running for re-election this year, “might be more beholden to the federal government’s demands than to the desires of his own constituents.”
“This appearance is unavoidable and supports a dismissal with prejudice,” Ho wrote.
The DOJ’s “request, if approved, would leave Mayor Adams vulnerable to reindictment at virtually any time, and for virtually any reason,” Ho explained.
The judge highlighted that Adams had requested a dismissal with prejudice, and that the DOJ had not contested that motion, effectively waiving any objection to the permanent dismissal of this case.
Ho firmly dismissed the DOJ’s claims that the prosecution of Adams was compromised by “appearances of impropriety,” stating that such claims were “unsupported by any objective evidence.”
“Instead, the record before the Court demonstrates that the prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York who handled this case adhered to all appropriate Justice Department guidelines,” Ho commented.
“There is no evidence — zero — suggesting they acted with any improper motives.”
However, the judge noted two reasons for dismissing the case: the protection of a criminal defendant’s rights and Ho’s inability to compel the DOJ to prosecute Adams.
“This case should have never been initiated and I did nothing wrong,” Adams stated during a news conference.
“I’m relieved that our city can finally move forward and focus,” he added. “I want to express my gratitude to New Yorkers who supported me from day one, prayed for me, and stood by my side while we concentrated on the work at hand.”
The DOJ, in a statement to NBC News, remarked, “This case exemplified political weaponization and a waste of resources.”
“We remain focused on arresting and prosecuting terrorists while returning the Department of Justice to its core mission of safeguarding Americans,” the DOJ stated.
Adams, a former New York City police officer, was indicted in September on charges alleging a decade-long campaign contribution scheme, bribery, and other allegations.
The indictment accused Adams of receiving illegal contributions for his 2021 mayoral campaign and of accepting complimentary luxury travel dating back to 2016, when he served as Brooklyn borough president.
Prosecutors alleged that a senior figure in Turkey’s diplomatic establishment facilitated campaign donations to Adams and arranged for him and others to receive free or discounted travel on Turkey’s national airline to various destinations, including France, China, Sri Lanka, India, Hungary, and Turkey.
In return, the indictment states, Adams pressured the New York City Fire Department to expedite the opening of Turkey’s new consulate building without a fire inspection in time for a visit from Turkey’s president.
The case was initiated by the DOJ while then-President Joe Biden, a Democrat, was still in office.
Following the charges, Adams sought to gain favor with Trump, which was perceived as an attempt to have the case dismissed or to obtain a pardon from the Republican.
Former acting U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon, who resigned in February instead of complying with an order to dismiss the case, informed Attorney General Pam Bondi in a letter that Adams’ lawyers at a meeting “urged what amounted to a quid pro quo,” in which the mayor would support Trump’s immigration enforcement measures in exchange for the case’s dismissal.
Adams’ attorney, Spiro, has denied Sassoon’s claims.